012 026 461 8 



pH8^ 



E 440 
.5 

.T455 
Copy 1 



STATE OF THE UNION. 




SPEECH 

-^ OF 

.JAMES H. THOMAS, OF TENNESSEE, 






IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JANUARY 17, 18G1. 



The House being In the Committee of the Wliolc on tlie 
State of tlio Union — 

Mr. THOMAS said: 

Mr. Chairman: The object of our discussion 
in the House should be to promote the general 
welfare of the country. To eft'ect that object, a 
harmonious feeling sliouid predominate, if possi- 
ble; but I must say that the character of tlie debate 
which has preceded has not been to my taste. 
Yet, sir, we must conform ourselves to the cir- 
cumstances by which we are surrounded; and, 
with a view of discharging my duty, I desire to 
submit some remarks to the consideration of the 
committee, upon the subject which now so seri- 
ously engrosses public attention. 

This question of slavery has ever been trouble- 
some to this country. Yet our fathers were en- 
abled to dispose of it, and to dispose of it in such 
a way as to secure, not only our liberties, but the 
establishment of a Government which has led to 
a happiness and prosperity of oin- people unex- 
ampled in the history of the human family. When 
the Declaration of Independence was framed, 
every State of this Union was a slaveholdingState. 
They went through that war, and this trouble- 
some question troubled not the council, the camp, 
or the battle-field. We conducted that war to a 
successful termination, and to the establishment of 
our independence. In process of tijjie, when our 
convention assembled to establish a constitution, 
we had twelve slave States and but one free State. 
There was then in the northern mind a hostility 
to slavery. 

We frequently hear from the other side of this 
Chamber, the position taken that they want to 
bring back this Government to the principles of 
its fathers. It would be well for those gentlemen 
who desire to effect that object, to look to the 
spirit which actuated those wise and patriotic 
fathers of ours while assembled in convention. 
What do we find them doing then? Why, sir, 
the slave trade was then in existence, and was 
tolerated by many of the States of this Union, and 
some southern States were averse to its abolition. 
We find that when the first rough draft of the 
Constitution was submitted for discussion, it gave 
Congress the power to abolish the slave trade any 
time after 1800. A proposition was then made 



i that that trade should be extended to 1808. Ma- 
ryland and Virginia voted against that extension. 
' A distinguished member of that convention from 
I Connecticut (Roger Sherman) said that the south- 
ern States were essential for their welfare, and 
I that they would rather tolerate the slave trade 
I than part with two States — Georgia and South 
Carolina; and on a vote upon the proposition to 
I extend the slave trade eight years. New Hamp- 
: shire, Massachusetts, and Connecticut voted to 
give that extension, and, by their votes, the prop- 
osition was carried, and the slave trade extended 
eight years beyond the time to which some of the 
slave States contended it should be limited. And 
now what do we see upon this occasion .' Not a 
singlememberfromeitherof those three States will 
tolerate a southern State in removing one single 
one of those slaves, or their descendants, which 
were imported during those eight years, into 
any one of our Territories. But we pass on. We 
find that those fathers accommodated this matter 
among themselves; and they established a Con- 
stitution which has eminently served its purposes 
for nearly three quarters of a century. 

What is the history of the Government after- 
wards? Your Washington, your first and greatest 
President, approved and signed bills to appre- 
hend fugitive slaves, and to admit slave States 
into the Union. Your second President, John 
Adams, of Massachusetts, approved and signed 
a fugitive slave bill for the District of Columbia, 
and bills recognizing slavery in the southwestern 
Territory. Your Jefferson acquired the Terri- 
tory of Louisiana, with its slave property, and he 
signed and approved a bill to regulate the coast 
slave trade, by which slaves were permitted to be 
taken from one section of the Union to another 
for sale. And, sir, every President up to the pres- 
ent hour has approved and signed bills in con- 
formity to the views which arc contended for upon 
the part of the South; and it is only within the 
last few years that this opposition to the institu- 
tion'of the South has advanced to its present for- 
midable and threatening position. And why is it? 
It may be traced back to a morbid — pardon me, 
for lintend to say no thing intentionally offensive — 
but, in my judgment, it may be traced back to a 
morbid sensitiveness upon the part of tlie north- 



.TA^^ 



eni mind upon this subject. This hostility to 
slavery at its origin attracted little attention at the 
North, and few gave countenance to it; but it 
gradually got into the school-houses, into the 
school-books, into the pulpit, and into all the va- 
rious modes of education, and into all the means 
used in the formation of the moral sentiments of 
the people. It has been continued; and the pres- 
ent generation have been brought up and edu- 
cated from the nursery in a feeling of hostility to 
this institution, which was thus tolerated by the 
fathers of the Revolution in every State of the 
Union. This system of education has gone on 
until a large majority of the people of the North 
have grown up to manhood under such influences. 
And what is the result? It has formed political 
associations, and a political party which now pro- 
poses to take control of the Government of the 
country, and to do it upon the one singly, isolated 
idea of hostility to southern institutions. In 1856, 
this party first assumed a prominent and threat- 
ening attitude toward the South. And what do 
we find them declaring upon that occasion? When 
they formed the Republican party, in 1856, they 
formed it without regard to past political dift'er- 
ences and divisions. When they came to lay 
down their principles, they announced that as their 
cardinal doctrine. In that body we find men who 
had been Whigs, Democrats, and Americans; 
men who had belonged to all the political parties 
of the country; but all their past party predilec- 
tions were to be laid aside, and the new party, 
without regard to them, was to be formed. It 
Avas so formed, and their declaration was: 

" Resolved, That tlie Constitution confers upon Congress 
sovereign power over tlie Territories of tlic United States 
for tlieir government, anil in the exercise of that power, It 
Is both tli'e right and the duty of Congress to prohibit in ail 
tlie Territories the twin relics of barbarism — polygamy and 
slavery." 

In 1860 the same party again laid down their ' 
platform; which was as follows: ' 

" 8. That the normal condition of all the territory of the 
United States is that of freedom. That as our republican 
fathers, when they had abolished slavery in all our national 
territory, ordained that ' no person should be deprived of 
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law,' it I 
becomes our duty, by legislation, whenever such legisla- I 
tion is necessary, to maiiitain this provision of the Consti- | 
tution against all aUempts to violate it; and we deny the 
authority of Congress, of a Territorial Legislature, or of any [ 
individuals, to give legal existence to slavery in any Terri- 
tory of the United States." i 

When that party, in 1860, in convention, came ' 
to look out for a representative of tlie principles ' 
which they intended to inaugurate in the Govei n- \ 
ment, provided they succeeded, it looked all over 1 
the country for such an individual. The two i 
most prominent and eminent men who presented I 
themselves for that nomination were Hon. Mr. 
Seward, of New York, and Mr. Lincoln, of the 
State of Illinois. Upon the first ballot Mr. Sew- 
ard received a large plurality of the votes. But 
he was not nominated; and Mr. Lincoln was 
finally unanimously nominated and elected by 
that party; and it is now openly declared to the 
country that the former gentleman, Mr. Seward, 
is to be the prime minister of Mr. Lincoln, the 
successful candidate of the Republican party for 
President. These gentlemen owe their elevation 



to office to their opposition to southern institu- 
tions. They were selected and voted for, not for 
personal predilections, but for their devotion to 
the doctrines which they were known to have 
advocated, and for opinions they were known to 
entertain. 

Now, I call the attention of the committee and 
of the country to what, in brief, these opinions . 
were. Mr. Seward declares: 

" Slavery can bf limited to its present bounds; it can be 
ameliorated ; it can be, and it must be abolished, and you 
and I can and must do it. The task is as simple and easy 
as its consummation will be beneficent, and its rewards 
glovt'ing. It only requires to follow this simple rule of ac- 
tion : to do everywhere and on every occasion what wo 
can, and not to neglect or refuse to do what we can, at any 
time, because at that precise time, and on that particular 
occasion, we cannot do more. Circumstances determine 
possibilities." * * * * " Extend a cordial 
welcome to the fugitive who lays his weary limbs at your 
door, and defend him as you would your paternal gods. 

" Correct your own error that slavery has any constitu- 
tional guarantees wliich may not be released, and ought not 
to be relinquished." * * * * " You will soon 
bring the parties of the country into an effective aggression 
upon slavery." 

Again, he declares: 

" What a commentary upon the history of man is the fact, 
that eighteen years after the death of John (iuincy Adams, 
the people have for their standard-bearer Abraham Lincoln, 
confessing the obligations of the higher law, which the sage 
of Quincy proclaimed, and contending, for weal or woe, for 
life or death, in the irrepressible conflict between freedom 
and slavery. I desire only to say that we are in the last 
stage of the conflict, before the great triumphal inauguration 
of this policy into the Government of the United States." 

Now, sir, Mr. Seward was the highest candi- 
date on the first ballot, and is to be the prime 
minister of the incoming Administration. We 
now come to the declaration of the candidate who 
was ultimately nominated unanimou.vly by that 
convention. What does Mr. Lincoln declare? 
And it is such declarations as these that have 
given him his present high position in the coun- 
j try. He says: 

" What I do say is, that no man is good enough to govern 
another man without the other man's consent, I say this is 
the leading principle, the sheet anchor of ^itncrican Rc- 
puhlicanism.'' 

Again, in Chicago, o!) the lOih of July, 1858, 
he said: 

" T should like to know if, taking the old Declaration of 
Independence,^which declares that all men are equal upon 
principle, and making exceptions to it, where will it stop.-' 
If one man says it does not mean a negro, why not another 
say it does not mean some other man .' If that declaration 
is not the truth, let us get the statute-book in which we find 
it, and tear it out. Who is so bold as to do it.' If it is not 
true, let us tear it out. [Cries of < No !' ' No !'] Let us 
stick to it, then ; let us stand firmly by it, then." * * 
* * " Let us discard all this quibbling about this man 
and the other man — this race and that race and the other 
race being inferior, and therefore they must be placed in an 
interior position — iliscarding the standard that we have left 
us. Let us discard all these things, and unite as one people 
throughout this land until we shall once more stand up de- 
claring that all men are created equal." * * ♦ * 
" I leave you, hoping that the lamp of liberty will burn in 
your bosom until there shall no longer be a doubt that all 
men are created free and equal." 

Now, sir, here we liave placed before us the 
ground on which this candidate was presented 
for election. And what is it? It is not that he 
either favored or was opposed to a protective tariff; 
not that he was for one policy or the other, dis- 



connected with slavery. I ask you wlicthcr, if , 
tlierc had been no slaves in the United 8:ates, and I 
it" he liad entertained Kimihir opinions ahoiit sia- ' 
very in Cuba or Hrazil, would .sucii opinions ever i 
have been considered when the nomination eame 
to be made? No, sir, that nomination was made j 
solely, mainly, and particularly, on the f^round of; 
hostility to slavery. It is one of his open declar-1 
ations that he iiates slavery as had as any AI)oli- 
tionisl. It M-as that very hatred which gave him 
the confidence of the party that has elected him | 
to power. I 

Then, how do we stand r Here is a party com- 
posed of men of the northern iSlati s alone, of 
whom not one sinjjle individual owns a slave; 
and probably not one twentieth of those who] 
voted for Mr. Lincoln ever saw a slave. Theyj 
have none of the evils or advantao;es of that in- 
stitution among them. And yet they chose Mr. ' 
Lincoln for his opinions in re2;ard to an institu-! 
tion with which they have no connection, and 
in which they have no practical interest, llej 
was selected liecause of his liatred to slavery. In ! 
other words, he was selected, not for any jmrtic-j 
ular views of policy that he has in regard to { 
northern institutions or northern interests, but| 
because of the views which he entertains in re-; 
gard to southern interests. He was elected, not! 
to govern the North, but to govern the South; to ; 
govern a portion of the Union in which he has no i 
party, and where there is no respectable portion 
of citizens who, for a moment, tolerate his elec- ! 
tion to office on such principles. So far as the | 
South is concerned, we of the South have had [ 
no more to do in the election of Mr. Lincoln than i 
we have had to do with the election of the Emperor: 
of France. He is to us a foreign ruler. He is, 
elected by men who have no sympathy with us,' 
who are hostile to our great interests. < 

I submit to the consideration of every candid 
mind, if any court on earth would ajipoint a 
guardian over a property where the application' 
was made for the sole purpose of destroying the 
estate; where the applicant was hostile to the in- 
terest of which he desired to have the control, and, 
only sought the trust for its destruction; is there 
a court on earth, claiming to know what equity 
and justice is, who would for a moment think of 
appointing him ? And yet you are determined to; 
place the guardianship of the rights of the South ; 
on the slavery question, in the liandsof men who 
come here declaring their hostility to slavery, and 
claiming the right to take charge of that institu- 
tion to which they are hostile, and on the destruc- 
tion of which they are determined. I submit to 
the consideration of this committee, and of the 
country, whether it is an American principle, that 
ihe party who has no interest in the subject-mat- 
ter should select a guardian for it, and choose him 
from among those hostile to it.' I 

But it may be said that our Government is one 
of majorities. True: in on(; sense it is a Govern- , 
ment of majorities. But Mr. Lincoln has only a ^ 
bare majority of the electoral vote; and when you 
come to examine the record of the great popular 
voice of the people of the United States, you will 
find that he is nearly a million in the minority. 
Thus, by nearly a million minority of votes, has 



Mr. Lincoln been elected to iht office of President 

of the United Stales. 

Again, sir; this idea of majorities governing 
ought to be limited to the people who are inter- 
ested in the subject. The people of Mns.sacliu- 
setts or the people of Virginia might well submit 
a .subject to the will of their rea|iective States, and 
be governed by the majority; but the principle 
does not hold good where the question in sub- 
mitted to those who have no interest whatever 
in it. 

Upon the subject of slavery, or any local in- 
terest of the South, I maintain that if majorities 
in the North, or if every man in the North, were 
in favor of hostile legislation, it would be anti- 
American, and contrary to all llie principles of our 
Govcrimient for them to assume to govern such 
local institution, and especially to govern it in such 
a way as to bring about its destruction. Why is 
it that the northern people have felt it incumbent 
on them to jfiin in a crusade against this institu- 
tion .' We are often told that the slave power has 
had the control of the Government; but I main- 
tain that the Government has not been controlled 
with a view to promote slavery, or in opposition 
to slavery; and that is the view in which the 
South has ever maintained the Government should 
be controlled. But slavery is a living, existing 
interest in the country, and should share the com- 
mon weal or common woe of the country, like 
other great interests. 

I submit to the committee and to the country, 
what reason can be given, from a review of his- 
tory, for so bitter a contest against this institution 
of the South ? Has slavery made such rapid 
strides since the foundation of this Government as 
to alarm those philanthropists, if philanthropists 
they be? At the time of the treaty of peace in 
178M, the States now called southern owned ter- 
ritory to the extent of 6.38,01G square miles, and 
the northern States 169, 6G2; or tlie South owned 
468,354 square miles more than the North. Vir- 
ginia ceded territory to the extent of 239,558 
square miles, and excluded slavery therefrom; 
thus giving the North 40!),220, and reducing the 
Soutli to 398,458 square miles. The South was 
then strong, and the North was weak. How has 
that generosity and magnanimity been requited? 
How is it now proposed to be requited by the 
northern Slates : The very States of the North- 
west, of the territory thus generously ceded by 
the State of Virginia, are this day enlisted in the 
ranks of our adversaries; and a large majority of 
their Representatives on this floor are voting and 
acting to-day with the party that is attempting 
to deprive tne old mother Commonwealth, the 
mother of those States, of any right in the Terri- 
tories that have been subsequently acquired, al- 
though they were acquired by the joint blood and 
trea.sure of Virginia with all the States. 

Biit,sir, let us follow out that idea: By the Lou- 
isiana purchase, we acquired 1,136,496 square 
miles. Of this th.e North has secured 977,602 
square miles, and the South 333,624— the North 
acquiring 643,978 square miles more than the 
South. 

By the Florida purchase, the South acquired 
59,268; and by the annexationof Texas, 274,356; 



total by these last two acquisitions, 333,624 square 
miles. 

By the Mexican treaty, the total acquisition is 
665,486 square miles. Of this the North has Cal- 
ifornia, containing 188,981 square miles, leaving 
476,505 square miles in New Mexico and Utah 
tobesettled. And the present efi'ort of your party 
is to exclude the South from the whole of this; 
while the South only asks equality in it. And, 
sir, I may remark, in relation to that territory, 
that it is the most barren, bleak, mountainous, 
and unproductive territory that this Government 
has ever acquired. The soil and climate of that 
territory are such that your own distinguished 
Daniel Webster declared that slavery could never 
go there; that the law of nature prohibited it; and 
that, to enact the Wilmot proviso in regard to it, 
would be only to retinact the law of God. 

I will refer again to the statistics that I have 
collected from the report of the Commissioner of 
the Land Office: 

Square miles. 

In 178.3 the South owned 638,016 

Virginia ceded 239,558 

Leaving tlie South but 398,458 

From the Louisiana purchase tlie South ac- 
quired but 158,896 

Florida 59,268 

Texas '. 274,356 

Present South 890,978 

Total increase of tlie South 252,982 

In 1783, the North had 169,662 

Virginia cession 239,558 

Louisiana purchase 977,602 

Me.xican treaty 188,981 

1,575,803 

Total increase of the North since 1783 1,406,141 

In seventy-six years the South has gained but 
252,962 square miles, and the North, in the same 
period, has gained 1,406,141 square miles. The 
South has increased her limits about 33 per cent., 
while the North has extended near 1,000 per cent. 
In 1,217,160 square miles of the territory thus ac- 
quired by the North, slavery existed by law, but 
is now abolished. Of the small amount acquired 
by the South, it was all slave territory when 
acquired, and so remains. 

That is the history of the progress of the two 
sections. Where, then, is there the slightest pre- 
text of our northern friends for one moment en- 
tertaining the belief that slavery is to be spread 
all over the country. This idea that the 8outh, 
""or the Democratic party, or any party at the South, 
are slavery propagandists, by and through the 
Federal Government, is a mistake, and northern 

Soliticians have misled the public mind of the 
forth when they have attempted to promulge 
such an idea. The only position taken by any 
party in the South is, that we of the South are 
equals in this Union, and that when Territories 
are acquired our citizens have the right, under our 
Constitution, to go there, and that no power short 
of the people of the Territories themselves can at 
any time exclude them from this right. There is 
some division among us as to when the people of 



a Territory should act — whether they should do 
it while in a territorial capacity, or whether they 
should wait until they form a State constitution; 
but all agree that there is no power which can ex- 
clude the South from her rights in a Territory 
but the people who settle that Territory. We are 
in favor of the largest liberty to the people to go 
to the Teri'itories that are acquired by the com- 
mon blood and the common treasure of all the 
States and of all the citizens of all the States, and 
to stand upon a perfect equality in relation to their 
rights in those Territories. 

What objection can the North have to that? 
It is not that slavery will go up North. Every 
man who knows the character of the northern 
people, knows that they look well to their own 
interests, and they have abolished slavery in the 
northern States; and in doing that, they have 
shown by their example that there is no fear that 
slavery will ever go where it is unprofitable. This 
being so, why is it that there is this hostility in 
the public mind at the North against this insti- 
tution of slavery ? Sir, they have got ingrafted 
on their minds an idea that slavery is sinful, 
and that this Government is responsible for the 
sin of slavery, if it be tolerated. Doubtless a large 
majority of the people of the North are devoted 
to the Constitution! of this country, and are will- 
ing to give us our constitutional rights, if they 
were not misled upon this subject. In my hum- 
ble judgment they have been, whether intention- 
ally or not, grossly misled. They have been 
taught that the Constitution of the country does 
not recognize the right of property in man, and 
that if slavery is permitted to go into any of the 
Territories it will make them accessory to thia 
great sin of slavery. Why, sir, we must look to 
the circumstances that attended our Declaration of 
Independence, and the formation of this Consti- ' 
tution. The ships of the North and of the South 
were then engaged in the African slave trade. 
They were going to Africa, and there buying or 
kindnapping negroes, and bringing them to the 
United States, and selling them to the citizens of 
the Union as slaves. A proposition was made to 
abolish that trade, or to give Congress the power 
to abolish it; but the North, the States of Massa- 
chusetts, Connecticut, and New Hampshire, said 
that they wanted the trade extended, at least until 
1808; thus giving them twenty years more to bring 
this species of property to the United States, sell 
it, and pocket the profits of the sale. It was 
the idea entertained then, universally. Nobody 
thought of any thing else than that they were 
legally bought and sold as property. 

But, sir, when you came to organize the Mis- 
sissippi Territory, you put in your bill, that any 
man being the owner of a slave might take that . 
slave into that Territory and there reside. And 
every Administration from that day to this, and 
every President of the United States, has recog- 
nized the same idea. Congress has again arid 
again recognized it, and directed slaves to be paid 
for as property. Your treaties have recognized 
it. And, sir, not only that, but your courts have 
again and again recognized it. Your Government 
in all its branches, executive, legislative, and ju- 
dicial, have been treating slaves as property up to 



this good hour. And now, when an individual 
pursues his shive into the State of Ohio, if you 
please, and apprehends him, by what ri<cht does 
he apprehend him ? Why, umlor the right to tlio 
service and iiibor of the slave. Tiiat is technically 
the right under the language omployud by the Con- 
stitution; but what does it mean ? It matters not 
whether the individual who has escaped owes ser- 
vice for a day, for a year, or for life -.he is subject to 
be delivered up when a fugitive from his master. 
Upon what other ground lias the master the right 
to reclaim his slave who has escaped into another 
State, unless it be a right conceded under the Con- 
stitution, that he has the sole and exclusive con- 
trol over the services of the slave to as full nn 
extent as he has over any other species of prop- 
erty, real or jiersonal, not inconsistent with the 
laws of humanity ? 

The gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. Stanton,] the 
other day, contended before this House that the 
admission that slaves were property would in- 
volve us in interminable difficulties. Why? He 
objected to the admission of the right; for the rea- 
son, among others, that, if a man in Iransitu 
through a free State with his slave should die, and 
die indebted to the citizens of such free State, an 
administrator in such State could not inventory 
the slave as property, or subject him to the pay- 
ment of such indebtedness. "VVhy, sir, if the gen- 
tleman from Ohio had reflected upon the result of 
that provision of the Constitution relating to fugi- 
tive slaves, according to his own construction of 
it, he would have seen that the same difficulty 
might occur. Suppose a slave escaping from Ken- 
tucky into Ohio is pursued- and apprehended by 
his master, but before his return his master dies, 
owing debts in that State: the slave could not be 
sold there; a writ of fieri facias could not reach 
him; but he could be taken back to Kentucky, and 
there be sold in the marKCt. Suppose the slave 
escapes, and is apprehended by his owner in a 
free State, where the master dies: surely his per- 
sonal representative — his heirs or administrators 
— would have the right to carry him iiack, and 
apply the proceeds of his sale to the debts of his , 
deceased owner. 

But again: the gentleman from Ohio says, sup- 
pose the master, while in transitu through a free 
State, kills his slave, or his slave kills him: what 
is then to be done ? Precisely the same difficulty 
"would arise in case the owner of a fugitive slave, 
having apprehended him in a free State, should, 
while returning, in the exercise of his authority, 
kill, or be killed by the slave. The gentleman's 
State should provide for such a contingency; and 
if they have not legislated upou the subject, it is 
not my fault. . 

And so in respect to all the difficulties which i 
our friends of the North find growing out of the 
recognition of the right of property in slaves. 
There are no difficulties which did not exist in 
the minds of our fathers who framed the Consti- 
tution, and which were not fully met by them in 'j 
the instrument framed by them, with the intention j 
of compromising and settling them upon princi- ; 
pies having respect to the rights of all the States I 
of the Union. i. 

Now, sir, when we look at the history of this I 



country and see its progress; when we see the 
difficulties which have from time to time come up 
and been settled by the wisdom of our fathers, is 
it not strange that our friends in the North should 
unite in such numbers upon an issue that has so 
little in il, affecting not only their owti welfare, 
but the welfare of the whole country? Why, sir, 
if we are permitted to tak<' our slaves into the 
common Territories of the country, il does not 
add a single one to the number; ildoes not bring 
anotln.T slave within the limits of the United 
States. It only authorizes the master to change 
his location; itdois not luing him nearer to you. 
Most likely it will liave the eflect of removing him 
further from those gentlemen from the North who 
represent that section upon this floor. But gen- 
tlemen tell us they want these Territories for freo 
labor. Mr. Chauman, I submit tiiat there is 
much in the conduct of this party at ihe North 
calculated to break up and forever destroy that 
feeling of friendship which once existed, ana must 
again exist before we ran sustain a united Gov- 
ernment. The Territories of the Govcrnm(?nt arc 
the common properly of all thi' Slates. No man 
will say that ihe South has failed to contribute 
her share in their acquisition, wlielhcr it be in 
cash or blood. No man can say it. 

Then why .sliould we not liavea common right 
to that territory ? Wiiatare you gentlemen of the 
North indicating by your policy in this House ? 
It is not to Secure the territory for your own chil- 
dren. You do not expect to populate it by your 
own offspring; certainly not m the present day. 
You have, during the present session, passed a bdl 
giving an inheritance in that territory not only to 
your children, but to the children of every man in 
the v.'orld who chooses to go there, to the children 
even of the Hessian, who, for a price, fought 
against our fathers in the war of the Revolution; 
while you refuse to permit the descendants of 
General Green, or of any of the heroes of the Rev- 
olution in the South, to go there and lake their 
property with them. 

Call you this fair dealing? Is this loyalty to 
us or to the memories of the Revolution ? Is it 
that spirit that actuated the framers of the Con- 
stitution, when they, compromising all the diffi- 
culties before them, framed the Government under 
which we have grown up and existed as a nation 
so long and so prosperously? 

Sir, these difficulties are continually thrown in 
our way. A determined disposition is manifested 
to take that territory from us, to circumscribe us 
within our present limits; while they will permit 
homesteads to be granted to the descendants of 
our former enemies, and will populate it with men 
who cannot even speak our language, and to whom 
they should be bound by no stronger ties of aflec- 
tion than they should be to the men of the South, 
who shared in all the dangers and hardships of 
its acquisition. 

I have no hostility to foreigners; but, sir, when 
I see the legislative bodies of my country legis- 
lating with a view to give them precedence over 
the descendants of the revolutionary sires of the 
South, I feel that it is time for us to speak out — 
to demand at least the rights of the people of the 
South. There can be nothing wrong in that. 



6 



We do not claim any exclusive right in any of 
tTie Territories. We only claim the same right 
in those Territories that are secured to the people 
of the North. We demand nothing more; \vc 
can submit, sir, to nothmg less. We do not ask 
to exclude one of the northern people, or any 
species of property possessed by the northern 
people. But you propose to exclude us, unless 
we divest ourselves of our household servants — 
a property which is endeared to us from our ear- 
liest recollections, and for which we have higher 
regard than for any other species of our prop- 
erty. The relations which exist between the mas- 
ter and servant create a sympathy unlike that 
■which you feel for your homestead and your farm 
horses and wagons. It is a kind of friendship. 
It is a devotion of fellow-feeling characteristic of 
that institution, which never has been, and which 
I fear never will be, justly appreciated by the 
North. They are a part of us. They sympathize 
with us, and we sympathize with them. Our 
rights are tlieir rights; and when we prosper, ; 
they prosper. If we can go to a country where 
we can do better than where we are, the slaves 
that go with us are bettered in an equal propor- [ 
tion with ourselves. Hence, sir, it is that we 
claim all the rights of equality in this Union. 

But, Mr. Chairman, the time lias gone by for 
the discussion of tliis question at length. We | 
Iiave passed from theories and come to facts. Such 
has been the character of the dealings of the North i 
toward the South — all of which 1 have not the 
tirrie, in the few minutes left me, to refer to — that 
the South feels her rights are no longer safe in ! 
this Government without some new guarantees \ 
for their protection. Under that feeling, four States ! 
have already seceded from the Union; and, sir, I 
probably while I am addressing this committee, ' 
the fifih will take its leave of us. These are the 
facts that stare us in the face. Disunion has taken [ 
place. Many of the great minds of the South 
have taken the ground that the right of secession 
is a right over and above the Constitution — but a j 
right recognized by the peculiar manner in which [ 
that instrument was framed. I have not the time ; 
on this occasion, nor do I think the great body of ; 
the South are going to take time to investigate the [ 
very nice and very able legal arguments made o)i 
this subject. We go back to first great principles. | 
It is enough for the people of the South to look I 
to the Declaration of Independence. We believe ! 
that— I 

" When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing 
invarial)ly tlie same object, evinces a design to reduce tbcm 
under absolute despotism, it is their riglit, it is llieir duty, |i 
to throw off such government, and to provide new guards j' 
for tlieir future safety." j 

The ground is taken here, that we cannot and I 
will not be permitted to secede peaceably from '' 
this Union. If the action in the Senate ycster- [ 
day means anything, it means that. This thing ! 
of secession is not to be permitted. The Army i 
and the Navy are to be employed against us. I 
The money appropriated in the bill now before us 
— the Army appropriation bill — is to be used for 
the purpose of sending troops to the South, with 
a view to the coercion of seceding States, and the 
pinning of ^his Union once more together by the 



jj bayonet of Federal troops. I will submit an ex- 
j! tract from the letter of acceptance of Hon. Ed- 
I ward Evcret', a distinguished citizen of Massa- 
chusetts. He is entitled to respect. His opinion, 
at least, will show the opinions and feelings of 
' the party which supported him. He says: 

" The suggestion that the Union can be maintained by 
the luimerical predominance and military prowess of one 

! section, exerted to coerce the other into submission, is, in 
my judgment, as self-contradictoiy as it is dangerous. Jt 
conies loaded with tlie death-smell from fields wet with 

, brothers' blood. If the vital principle of all republican gov- 
ernment 'is the consent of the governed,' much more does 
a union of coequal sovereign States require, as its bases, the 
liarmony of its members and their voluntary cooperation In 
its organic functions." 

Mr. Chairman, the people of the South regard 

that as the true doctrine. They believe that this 

is a Government founded in the consent of the 

people governed; and that all efforts made to 

coerce a sovereign State will be deemed an attack 

upon the great body of the South. Whenever 

such efforts are made, I venture to say — and with 

no desire to indulge in boasting; it is my solemn 

I conviction — that every State from this to the Rio 

; Grande will unite as a band of brothers, and as a 

I band of brothers will resist to the last; resist any 

, and every blow struck against a seceding State to 

; compel her to remain in the Union. 

I Mr. Chairman, we regard the Constitution of 

j the United States as the casket in which our fore- 

i fathers deposited the jewels of justice; of the in- 

j surance of domestic tranquillity; of provision for 

I the common defense; the promotion of the general 

welfare, and the security of the blessings of liberty 

I to ourselves and our posterity. Those were the 

I jewels deposited in the casket. When you rifle 

] it of these treasures, do you suppose that eulogies 

upon the glorious Union will attach the people and 

the States of the South to it? No, sir; they will 

dash it from them as an unholy thing. It is the 

treasure that gives it value, and not that in which 

the treasure is contained. 

But I have heard the idea frequently thrown 
out that you do not mean to make war upon the 
seceding States; that all you mean to do is, to let 
them do without the United States courts and post 
offices. It is declared that this Government will 
let the seceding States do without the advantages 
of this Union, while they will be compelled to pay 
their share of the revenue. That is the sort of coer- 
cion which George III attempted to put in force 
against the revolted American colonies. He made 
war upon them for no other purpose but to com- 
pel them to pay the tea tax and the stamp duty. 
Is such a war consistent with the principles of 
American freedoni? If so, then you can prose- 
cute your war for the purpose of collecting the 
revenue, and yet use no coercion. Suppose the 
Constitution of the United States made it the 
especial duty of the Government to coerce every 
State that was not willingly subject to its control: 
what would you do? You would only enforce 
the law; the very thing, sir, you now claim that 
you will do, and yet you will not coerce. 

Mr. Chaii-man,"let this thing be attended to; 
not that I invite it, but let it be attended to; or 
who can imagine the terrible consequences that 
must result? Is it not known that one, five, or fif- 



/ 



teen States cannot be conquered and held in sub- 
jection? It cannot lie done; nor do I claim lliat 
we can conquer tiic North. Wiiat did it cost ilii.s 
Government to getliftcen hundred Seminole war- 
riors out of the everuiladcs of Florida? We ex- 
pended more than tliirly million dollars out of 
the |Hiblic Treasury in llmt littli> war; and now, 
when you talk of conquerinj,^ Slates, the whole 
arithmetic fails in figures to count the cost tiint 
will follow the attempt. I submit this, not as n 
th .....' 



Nortli Carolina to the Rio Graiule, are nearly all- 
in possession of the seceding Stales. We can be 
content with no adjustment tlnit will not unite 
the South with us. The Houthern States have a 
common inten st and a cummon destiny. 

You censure the soutlifrn Sliilea for their pre- 
cipitancy. Upon this subject we of the border 
slave State.q have more reason to complain than 
you. They and we have l(dd you fuv years, in 
the most s(demn manner, that we could not sub- 



■a , but as the plan, conseque-nces of an act of mit to youraggre«sionH,«nd entreate.l you to for- 
his character. It such poheyas th.s ,s to result bear; yet youT.nve not heeded, but havc".n«u Ited 
.n no good to any portion ot th.. U.uon, but in us nnJ told u.s that it was with U8 mere boastllil- 
nUerminnble evil, I submit, why is it necessary !| ness ooasiiui- 

xnedicnt? And let me say, here, that all that 

lid or done upon this subject of conquering. 



or ex 
is sa 



or using force, or coercion, but adds fuel to the 
flame through the whole South. If this Govern- 
ment had manifested aniorepeacL'able disjiosition, 
and had, from the commencement of this excite- 
ment, proclaimed through Congress that no force 
would be used, I believe that not mo 



You complain that the seceding Slates have 
seized the forts and other public |)rop«rty. These 
forts were permitted to be erected in these States 
for their defense, and the arms that have been 
taken were placed there for the same purpose. 
The Federal Government has no right to use this 



property for any other purpose. And whenever 




-„-j...,„. ..,„.„. ^. ...„,„..^ ..„,j, uiMviiftaiiy con- 1 I ou complain tliat i<loriUaand othei 
cur in the idea that the true and proper mode of purchased and paid for, and that they cannot 
putting down civil war is to grant to the people ' therefore, secedeV Gentlemen are surely for reviv-' 
what they ask. And what has the South a.sked > ingthe doctrines of the dark ages of the common 

eifin', ,\ p"' ^'f,\"^T. ^'",e"' ncver!|law,by which theywouldmaketheinhabitantsof 
comeinto the Congress ot the United States and ll the purchased territory n7/«i«., in -rross; attached 

to the freehold, and bought and sold with it. Flor- 



asked for the passage of a law favoring and estab 
lishing slavery upon any portion of the continent. 
She has only asked that all the rights we have 
shall be protected by the Government. We do 
not get rights from this Government. We have 
them over and above the Government. The Gov- 



ida cost §5,000,000. Every State of the old thirteen 
was purchased. They cost the blood of the Rev- 
olution—a price greatly above that paid for our 
subsequent acquisitions. In all the treaties ac- 
quiring territory, we have stipulated for their 




It this matter IS to be settled— and possibly it yet- i You could have quieted the country, and re- 
may be— It must be done by aconcession. And 1; stored peace and prosperity, at no sacrifice but 
what do you yield ? What do our northern friends j | the yielding of your prejudices. We cannot, with- 
yield? Nothing; absolutely nothing. They will i out ruin and dishonor. In the language of a dis- 
have the same rights m the Territories which ;| tinguished southerner: 

- Pm;nll^'-'"tl "^n ^'"''"^ "" r""' 'i" ^°""' '';•'! '■''''' '"-'y '"^ '-^ '^'■"<'-""" -J"y comparative ea.c. 
_ equality in the Union, or independence out ot ! gather up our iVct in our beds, ari.l die in peace; but our 

It." That is the watchword. That is the feeling jj e'lildren will go lortli beggarcrl iroiu ilie lioiucs oi" their 

of our people of all sections, so far as m v inform" 1 1 ''"''''^'■^- .Fisli'Tinen will cast their nets where your proud 

ation evtPml« I ^ commercial navy now rides at anclior, and dry them upon 

T<T .• . , 1 , I 'lie shore now covered with your bales of merchandise. 

aiy constituents have not been, nor have I i trapped, circumvented, undernunrd, the Instiiuiions of 
been, for secession. We have hoped for safety I >'"'"■ ^°i' ^^''1 ^^ overthrown ; and within five and twenty 
in the Union ; and have desired that all means to I -r^^.l "'« '"f '"'7 o*" Si- Domingo will be the record of the 
ortv,^. ti,„t „.,,! „i 111 ,1 , >i r .• I f">utn. It dead men's bones can trembe, ours will move 

eftect that end shall be exhausted before a resort is ; under the muttered curses of sons and daughter.-, denounc- 
had to disunion. But while we waited for your ! j ing the blindness and love of ease which have left them an 
returning sense of justice towards us, disunion , '"'"^"'^'''^^ o'""'oc." 

has overtaken us; four, and perhaps five. States jl This calamity we will avert; peaceably if we 
have seceded; and the forts and arsenals, from I can, forcibly if we must. 



Printed at the office of the Congressional Globe. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



012 026 461 8 



